RGJ Attorney Offers Other Side To Gigafactory Trespass Story: Tesla Guards Roughed Up Journalists

OCT 20 2015 BY JAY COLE 96

Tesla Gigafactory Trespass In Nevada Ends In Photographer Charged With Battery With A Deadly Weapon (namely a Jeep)

Reno Gazette-Journal’s Lawyer Responds To An Altercation At Tesla’s Gigafactory From Earlier This Month

Last week there was an altercation at Tesla’s Gigafactory in Reno, Nevada.  Specifically detailed in a Tesla blog post and detailed by the Reno Gazette-Journal.

This was the story at the time (full details):

“Two employees and a company vehicle for the Gazette-Journal trespassed onto the Gigafactory property Friday morning, and that illegal action ultimately resulted in a couple Tesla employees being struck with a Jeep (in separate incidents) driven by one of the Gazette-Journal’s photographers while trying to flee from security.  Another journalist was also in the vehicle.”

Tesla Gigafactory: Pretty Remote Indeed

Tesla Gigafactory: Pretty Remote Indeed

The end result was one of the Gazette-Journal’s photographers, Andy Barron, being booked on a charge of battery with a deadly weapon according to Storey County Sheriff Gerald Antinoro.  Reno Gazette-Journal’s Publisher John Maher made a brief statement on the incident at the time saying, “We take this situation very seriously and it is under investigation at this time,” and added nothing further.

Today, via RGJ’s lawyer Scott Glogovac in a letter sent to Tesla, we have a different version of what happened after the trespassing occurred.

“This portrayal is scandalous and could not be further from the truth,” Glogovac said of Tesla’s version of events (which you can find at the bottom of this article) via the Reno Gazette-Journal.

Mr. Glogovac’s letter stated that what actually happened that day, was that Tesla security guards rammed the Reno Gazette-Journal’s Jeep with an ATV, then smashed out the driver’s side window with a rock and cut Mr. Barron (the photographer) from his seat belt before shoving him to the ground.  This appears to be turning into a bit of a “he said, she said” situation.

“The purpose of the letter was to complete the picture of everything that happened out there on Oct. 9 and make sure Tesla is aware of the potential claims being made by Reno Gazette-Journal.”

Tesla Executive At Gigafactory Site Earlier This Year (Image Via Steve Jurvetson)

CEO Elon Musk And Tesla Executives At Gigafactory Site Earlier This Year (Image Via Steve Jurvetson)

The attorney also demanded for Tesla stop “mischaracterizing the altercation” and said the newspaper is considering whether to pursue both criminal and civil claims.

RGJ’s lawyer does acknowledge the trespass but says the end result was unjustified.

“Tesla has already (claimed) that the RGJ employees trespassed on Tesla property, but even if they trespassed, that didn’t give Tesla the right to attempt to detain or apprehend the employees in the manner it did: smashing a window, brandishing a knife, physically manhandling the photographer.”

Update: A Tesla spokesperson has responded to this new take on the events from the 9th:

“It’s disappointing to see that instead of taking appropriate action and investigating this serious incident as RGJ stated they would, RGJ has instead employed outside counsel to leak threatening letters to the press.  The letter seems designed to condone repeated trespassing and attack victims for seeking to stop the attack on them. We will not stand for assaults on our employees and are working with law enforcement to investigate this incident and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.”

The Gazette-Journal further details the incident’s events, saying that Barron and Reno Rebirth reporter Jason Hidalgo, had parked their Jeep in a publically accessible area, then “walked up an old road to a ridge overlooking the Gigafactory construction site”.   A Tesla security guard noticed the pair and demands they relinquish their cameras.

Completed Tesla Gigafactory Rendering

Completed Tesla Gigafactory Rendering

Without saying what transpired at that point of the conversation, the lawyer’s letter says the two RGJ “peacefully walking back to their vehicle”, at which point the Jeep was blocked by a second Tesla security guard and his Jeep.  Barron looked to pull around the ATV, but the Tesla security guard  “began ramming the side of the RGJ vehicle before pulling in front of it and forcing it to a stop.”

Glogovac then says the two were “descended upon” by security, with one guard jumping on the hood of the Jeep, while another broke the driver’s side window with a rock.

“A knife was then displayed by one of those individuals, who reached the knife through the broken window and, near the head of the RGJ driver, severed the driver’s side seatbelt,” Glogovac said.

From that point, the guard put Barron “face-first in the dirt with a knee or foot in his back.”

RGJ’s lawyer says the Reno Gazette-Journal is considering whether or not to pursue criminal assault and battery charges against the security guard, and thinks the two journalists themselves should pursue civil damage claims against Tesla.

“If the hard hat wearing individuals were, as Tesla has represented, Tesla security guards, those individuals were the lawless renegades, not the RGJ staffers,” Glogovac said.

We aren’t sure how the exact events can ever be determined between the two parties (short of video surveillance), but we are beginning to suspect the truth lies somewhere in between after hearing both accounts.  But first and foremost lesson?  Don’t knowingly trespass – bad things can happen.

Tesla’s account of the incident can be found in the below statement posted last week:

Journalists Trespass, Assault Tesla employees at the Gigafactory

Last Friday at approximately 11:50 am, a Tesla safety manager received a complaint about two trespassers taking pictures at the Gigafactory. The Tesla employee requested assistance and the Storey County Sheriff’s department was alerted. 

After locating the two trespassers, the Tesla employee approached them. He asked their names and notified them that they were trespassing on Tesla property. They refused to provide their names, despite the Reno Gazette Journal (“RGJ”) ID credentials hanging from their pockets. They also denied that they were trespassing even though they had climbed through a fence designated with “private property” signs.  

The vehicle belonging to the two trespassers was a Jeep marked with RGJ decals on both doors. The two individuals were later identified as RGJ employees.

The two RGJ employees and the Tesla employee were then met at the Jeep by a second safety manager at the Gigafactory. The two Gigafactory safety managers asked the RGJ employees to wait before departing, as security management and the Sheriff’s Department were en route to the scene. Disregarding this request, the RGJ employees entered the Jeep. As the Tesla employee attempted to record the license plate number on the rear bumper, the driver put it in reverse and accelerated into the Tesla employee, knocking him over, causing him to sustain a blow to the left hip, an approximate 2” bleeding laceration to his right forearm, a 3” bleeding laceration to his upper arm, and scrapes on both palms. 

As the RGJ employees fled the scene, their Jeep struck the ATV that carried the two safety managers. When one of the safety managers dismounted the ATV and approached the Jeep, the driver of the Jeep accelerated into him, striking him in the waist.

Once the Sheriff’s Department arrived on the scene, they arrested one of the RGJ employees for two counts of felony assault with a deadly weapon and advised that both will be charged with trespassing.

We appreciate the interest in the Gigafactory, but the repeated acts of trespassing, including by those working for the RGJ, is illegal, dangerous and needs to stop. In particular, we will not stand for assaults on our employees and are working with law enforcement to investigate this incident and ensure that those responsible are brought to justice.

Reno Gazette-Journal

Categories: Tesla

Tags:

Leave a Reply

96 Comments on "RGJ Attorney Offers Other Side To Gigafactory Trespass Story: Tesla Guards Roughed Up Journalists"

newest oldest most voted

Oh, I could see the rows that will happen in this comments section!

Are people going to believe a Security guard pulled a knife on someone for trespassing? Is that newspaper kidding? I know sales of papers have been declining but this is silly.

This complete story, with accounts from both sides, makes more sense. When Tesla presented it’s facts in the case, I thought their employees were either lying about what happened or deliberately only sharing part of the story which made themselves look good.

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out, however, it is not a stretch to imagine that Tesla’s security or construction workers were aggressive and escalated the situation needlessly by not allowing the reporters to leave. Seems like a sad unnecessary escalation. Call the police and let them handle it. “Omg they tresspassed, took pictures of a construction site. Confiscate their cameras and rough them up.”

Security guards are well within their rights to use force to restrain criminal trespassers until law enforcement can arrive to arrest them. Let’s take a step back and consider what apparently happened: A couple of paparazzi climbed over a fence onto Gigafactory property, despite clearly posted “No trespassing” signs. There was no rational reason for this; Tesla gives a tour to pretty much any reporter who asks. And it’s not like there were any deep dark secrets there for the paparazzi to film. One large two-story building under construction looks much like another. When they were caught by security, the trespassers refused to hand over their cameras and ran away. When they reached their car, one of the paparazzi got into the driver’s seat and backed the car into one of the guards, knocking him down. This is vehicular assault. The other guard apparently grabbed a rock and smashed the window of the car so he could grab the driver, then cut the driver’s seat belt so he could drag him out of the car and restrain him until Sheriff’s deputies arrived. Now, there is absolutely no action there by the security guards that deserves criticism, and in fact they… Read more »
evdrive — Please see “Nevada Code TITLE 14 PROCEDURE IN CRIMINAL CASES Chapter 171 Proceedings to Commitment NRS 171.126 Arrest by private person.” “NRS 171.126 Arrest by private person. A private person may arrest another: 1. For a public offense committed or attempted in the person’s presence. 2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in the person’s presence. 3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and the private person has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it.” The trespassing was a “public offense”, and arresting the suspected trespassers until the police arrived is completely legal under Nevada law. Indeed a security guard’s official duty to affect arrest until the police arrive, just like a mall security guard detains shoplifters until the police arrive. So they had full citizen’s arrest authority from the beginning, which was part of their jobs to do. Once the RGJ employees caused felony bodily harm by striking an employee with their deadly weapon (jeep), the guards had full authority to use necessary force required to enact arrest. The applying legal standards for necessary force are identical to those a police officer would be held to in… Read more »
Did the security guards tell the reporters they were under arrest before or after they beat them down? Did the security guards EVER tell the reporters that they were under arrest. I don’t recall Tesla stating that their security officers put the reporters under arrest. Certain procedures must be followed for a private person to make a citizen’s arrest, like actually TELLING the person that they are being placed under arrest. You know like: “We are placing you under citizen’s arrest for trespassing.” If the security guards don’t actually say the magic words, how do the reporters know they are being arrested and not just getting beat down by a bunch of rent-a-cop playing Rambo? When a cop doesn’t say the magic words “You’re under arrest”, the case should get tossed, but it’s a difficult to prove unless there are is video tape. Did the security guards read the reporters their Miranda rights? Were they required to? Please define public offense. If someone were actually invited to the Gigafactory, but while on Tesla property threw some litter on the ground, spit on the ground, or urinated on the ground, could they be arrested by Tesla security for those public offenses,… Read more »
Sven — In the State of Nevada, a “public offense” includes “any violation of a county, city or town ordinance or state law which is punishable as a misdemeanor” Here is the ruling law: “NRS 171.1772 Issuance of citation after arrest by private person. Whenever any person is arrested by a private person, as provided in NRS 171.126, for any violation of a county, city or town ordinance or state law which is punishable as a misdemeanor, such person arrested may be issued a misdemeanor citation by a peace officer in lieu of being immediately taken before a magistrate by the peace officer if: 1. The person arrested furnishes satisfactory evidence of identity; and 2. The peace officer has reasonable grounds to believe that the person arrested will keep a written promise to appear in court. ” No, there are no magical words you have to say while detaining somebody in Nevada. Simply conveying that they are being detained until the police arrive is sufficient to trigger this law. No, you do not need to give Miranda warnings (in any state) when you do a citizen’s arrest. Citizens aren’t expected to be able to quote Miranda by memory, and they… Read more »

+1

Nix:

Thank you very much for giving us an authoritative post regarding the actual facts about Nevada law as they pertain to the case. Hopefully we won’t see any more of the nonsense posted in comments on another InsideEV’s article, claiming that the security guards didn’t have an legal right to detain these trespassing paparazzi.

Arresting officers don’t even need to give Miranda rights of they are not planning on doing a field interview.

sven said:

“I don’t recall Tesla stating that their security officers put the reporters under arrest. Certain procedures must be followed for a private person to make a citizen’s arrest, like actually TELLING the person that they are being placed under arrest.”

So, you’re suggesting that nothing happened during the altercation that wasn’t stated in Tesla’s summary of the incident?

Here’s a better indication of who did or didn’t break the law: When sheriff’s deputies arrived, after being summoned by the security guards, the deputies arrested the trespassing paparazzi, not the guards.

sven — “could they be arrested by Tesla security for those public offenses, and thrown to the ground and forcefully held until police arrived?” Security guards everywhere (bouncers, mall cops, bank guards, etc) absolutely can use necessary force to detain you if you break the law. How much force they can use is based upon your own actions. Can they “throw you to the ground” JUST for public urination? No. Now if you start trying to urinate on them, YOUR ACTIONS allow them to use necessary force to detain you. If a bouncer needs to throw you to the ground in order to stop you urinating on them, or other customers, then they absolute can use that amount of force. The same as if you attempted to urinate on a police officer, they could absolutely force you to the ground using non-deadly force. But as I said in my initial post, once the RGJ employees struck a guard with their vehicle and caused bodily harm with a deadly weapon, their actions escalated the situation, and escalated the amount of reasonable force. Under the law in Nevada, an arrest is an arrest, whether done by a citizen or a officer of… Read more »

“But as I said in my initial post, once the RGJ employees struck a guard with their vehicle and caused bodily harm with a deadly weapon, their actions escalated the situation, and escalated the amount of reasonable force. ”

Hmm.. “Once the RGJ employee struck a guard” That is what Tesla version said. Doesn’t the RGJ version said that “Tesla security guards rammed the Reno Gazette-Journal’s Jeep with an ATV, then smashed out the driver’s side window with a rock and cut Mr. Barron (the photographer) from his seat belt before shoving him to the ground. This appears to be turning into a bit of a “he said, she said” situation.”

I guess we will find out in the court of law if excessive force is used.

Now, where are the Tesla security footages that we need to clear all that up?

The RGJ lawyer’s version of events never mentions at what time the guard was struck by the jeep, and given multiple bleeding lacerations.

Nor does the RGJ lawyer’s version of events deny that the guard was injured by being struck by the Jeep.

He simply never mentions it.

But the injuries were verified by the Sheriff who arrested the RGJ staffers, so we know they happened.

Where do you see anything from any party claiming that the guards went after the vehicle BEFORE it struck and injured the guard?

“necessary force”

The key phrase here subject to wild intepretation.

Police have been accused of using excessive force across the country recently and many police departments acorss the country have lost many suits due to exact “misuse” of the so called necessary force.

Now, all we need is a little video footage by Tesla Security camera to clear all the questions up.

Do you honestly believe that if a police officer was struck by a deadly weapon (vehicle) and was left with bleeding lacerations, that it would be excessive force for a fellow police officer to ram the vehicle to step it?

Or to break a window? Or to cut a seatbelt and pull the driver out and put a knee on them to hold them down?

Heck, those officers would get medals for their RESTRAINT in responding to somebody using a deadly weapon. They wouldn’t even face excessive force charges if they had decided to open fire.

Ironically, this comment hits close to home in NYC tonight. Earlier last night I was stuck in a monster traffic jam on the FDR Drive (highway) in Manhattan. It was a virtual parking lot. Since I was stuck, I pulled out my laptop to kill some time and checked InsideEVs to see if any new stories were posted and maybe fire off some comments. I eventually put on the AM radio to find out what was going on with the traffic jam. The radio news station reported that a police officer was shot on or near a footbridge that crosses over the FDR Drive, and the police had shut down the entire highway.

The officer was shot in the head and was pronounced dead later that evening at the hospital. My thoughts and prayers go out to the family and loved ones of NYPD Officer Randolph Holder, the fourth NYC police officer to die in the line of duty this year. RIP.

http://abc7ny.com/news/nypd-officer-shot-in-head-in-east-harlem-suspect-in-custody/1043075/

http://nypost.com/2015/10/20/nypd-cop-shot-in-east-harlem/

Time for dashboard and personnel cameras….

That’s the fishy part. They were professional photographers, one with 18 years of experience.

They had cameras in their hands, and were experts at using them.

I don’t buy that if they were 100% in the right and weren’t trespassing, that they wouldn’t have documented it photographically. That’s what they do for a living.

No photos from the professional photographers showing they weren’t trespassing smells like they knew they were in the wrong.

I don’t think anyone is arguing against the trespassing.

I think the part is who strike whom and was there excessive force used.

Doesn’t Tesla have security footages?

Funny how you ask the question here if Tesla has any video cameras (because you clearly don’t know one way or the other) — and in half a dozen other posts you simply demand Tesla release videos, as if suddenly you know!

What magical event happened between this post of yours, and the other posts you made? 5 shots of tequila?

I guess somebody got a stick up their a** about this whole thing, doesn’t it?

Modern cameras have video capability. I’m certain they could have filmed a video of the incident. The fact they didn’t says a lot IMO.

“The attorney also demanded for Tesla stop ‘mischaracterizing the altercation’ ”

Wow, a defense attorney complaining about the official Sheriff’s Department report “mischaracterizing” what really happened.

Almost like irony…

And the prisons are full of innocent men, too. Don’t believe me? Just ask the inmates! 😉

Instead, can I ask the hundreds of death row inmates who were exonerated and released based on DNA evidence after sitting on death row for decades?

Sure, go ahead, have fun…..

this is not funny 🙁

The journalists’ story sounds completely fabricated to me. Sure, the security guards might have roughed them up more than they care to admit but this story sounds like something out of a Hollywood movie.

Regardless…, They trespassed. They Shouldn’t of been there Period! The fault Rests on the “Intruders” .No Matter What! This would have never occured had they gone through the proper channels to access the premises Properly , legally, & without incident. PERIOD & FINAL

Hey! This situation is eerily close to one I experienced (although I didn’t trespass). I walked up a shoreline (lakeward of the high water mark), got on a pier, and photographed illegal dredging. The contractors and security came up and demanded my camera. I said no. They roughed me up. I win a civil claim. They lost on the criminal and civil case. Ah, memories…

Since you didn’t trespass, or cause bodily harm to anybody, you certainly deserved to win.

But these RGJ employees did, so you aren’t trying suggest the results should be the same here as was in your case, are you?

I am not suggesting anything about RGJ/Tesla situation.I don’t know enough facts to render a decision in that case. I will say that somebody did something stupid, chaos ensued, and things got stupider.

Thanks, that makes sense.

In my particular experience, one of the criminals blurted out, “WE CAN SHOOT TRESPASSERS!” Everyone came to their senses for an instant, looked at that guy, then lost their senses again. People can get unprofessional/crazy in the heat of the moment. You got to be cool. I don’t envy law enforcers’ jobs when they are confronted with idiots.

My incident happened not too far from Reno. The west gets wild sometimes.

“Since you didn’t trespass, or cause bodily harm to anybody, you certainly deserved to win. ”

All people are innocent until proven guilty beyond all reasonable doubt.

Trespassing is proabably real here. But who caused bodily harm is yet to be determined here. Apparently, there are currently two different versions of it.

Nothing in the RGJ lawyer’s comments deny that the jeep struck and injured the guard. He simply left that out of his narrative.

Yes, the facts will come out in a trial. But then again, we would have to shut down 99% of the public forums if we never speculated wildly in any posts about anything.

Actually, there is not two different stories about the guard being struck by the RGJ employees by their jeep.

There is only one story about that, from Tesla. The RGJ lawyer simply makes no mention of it, nor does he deny it even happened.

Instead he ignores it, leaving Tesla’s statements regarding that part of the incident uncontested.

The problem is there are too many pansy a**es that think that a crime should just get you a slap on the wrist and sent on your way with a bag of ice for your wrist.

I say make an example of those two clowns at RGJ.

The example is being made…

One can also be too tough on crime. It takes wisdom to mete out proper justice.

Aw hell, just shoot’em! I’m a hard-a**.

No I wouldn’t go that far as to shoot……lol, that’s too easy and a waste of two rounds.

But if they did get shot, would they think twice about doing it again?

Pansy a**

Jay,

Unless I missed it, the lawyer for the reporters never acknowledged the trespass. He said: “Tesla has already (claimed) that the RGJ employees trespassed on Tesla property, but even if they trespassed, that didn’t give . . .”

If you were their lawyer, you’d be smart to downplay the trespass.

Yes, because that would be giving away the case and letting Tesla automatically win in court.

Which means, those ‘journalists’ are gonna go down…

Of course the trespassing paparazzi’s lawyer did not admit in public that they had committed criminal trespass. Did you expect him to do that in a public statement? There’s no upside to doing that. Here is the original news report from the Reno Gazette-Journal, the paper for which the arrested reporters/paparazzi work. You’ll note there is no dispute by the paper, in this initial report, that they did indeed trespass: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Reno Gazette-Journal photographer was arrested Friday after an altercation with private security guards protecting the Tesla gigafactory site in Storey County. Andy Barron was booked on a charge of battery with a deadly weapon, Storey County Sheriff Gerald Antinoro said. “He was arrested after an altercation with the security guards when they attempted to detain him for trespassing,” Antinoro said. Antinoro said Barron tried to drive away from guards and “either hit or almost hit one or more of the security officers.” “They were stopped at that point in time and detained until my people got there and conducted an investigation that led to the arrest of whoever was driving the vehicle,” Antinoro said. Reno Gazette-Journal Publisher John Maher said the newspaper is taking the incident seriously. “We… Read more »

Sven — That statement doesn’t admit to the trespass (lawyers don’t admit their clients are guilty to the press), but it also doesn’t dispute that they were trespassing either.

This is lawyer speak for getting around admitting in public that their client is guilty — something that could be used against their clients in court. It absolutely does not imply that the lawyer is claiming they were not trespassing.

In another story, it is reported that:

“Lawyer Scott Glogovac does not dispute that the RGJ staffers were trespassing on Tesla’s Gigafactory property near Reno, resulting in a photographer’s arrest.”

Read more: http://www.leftlanenews.com/newspapers-lawyers-fire-back-over-teslas-assault-allegations-90008.html#ixzz3p9gydunp

These RGJ employees had cameras, and were professionals.

If they were in the right, why didn’t they have their cameras out documenting that they were in the right? Most cameras the quality a photographer would use now have video too. They could have easily both photographed and video taped where they were, proving their innocence.

In every version of events, the RGJ employees were confronted first outside of their vehicle. If they were well within their rights to be where they were, any professional photographer would start photographing their innocence and providing that proof to police.

Instead they tried to leave, knowing that the police were on their way. All parties agree to these facts, regardless of what else is in contention. All of the other events under contention happened AFTER they attempted to leave, not in the initial confrontation.

I’m not buying that they weren’t trespassing. It doesn’t even come close to passing the sniff test.

“All parties agree to these facts.”

No. I don’t think the attorney for the reporters stated that the reporters knew the police were on their way. I don’t know if I believe the security guards version of events. Did they call for police before the reporters tried to leave or after they smashed the Jeep and dragged the reporters out of it. Tesla conveniently left out the part where the a security guard pounded on and jumped on the hood of the Jeep, the rock thrown through the Jeep’s window, the ATV ramming into the Jeep, etc..

Let the truth come out and justice prevail.

Any unbiased reader of these reports could only conclude that you have a rather large anti-Tesla bias, sven. The sheriff’s deputies were summoned by the security guards, and they arrested the paparazzi. They didn’t arrest the security guards.

I think it’s pretty safe to think the sheriff’s deputies understand Nevada law better than you or I do. I think it’s also fairly safe to think that if the paparazzi in question had an assault case against the security guards, then the guards would have been arrested too.

Wait a second. Nobody is defending that those Journalists aren’t trespassing. Now the question is who caused bodily harm first. It was he said/she said case.

If Tesla got the security footages, then it would be easily presented at court hearing.

Now, what you keep describing a legitimate journalist as paparazzi fits the clear description of “bias”.

+1

ModernMarvelFan said:

“Now, what you keep describing a legitimate journalist as paparazzi fits the clear description of ‘bias’.”

Calling them “paparazzi” is a lot shorter than calling them “criminal and brainless so-called journalist scum who flagrantly ignore “No Trespassing” signs in order to take photographs that they could easily have gotten by asking politely, attempt to flee when confronted by security personnel, and then engage in vehicular assault when cornered”.

But if you prefer, I could call them “scum”. Calling them “paparazzi” is perhaps unfair to successful paparazzi, who generally have some reasonable belief that they might get paid a lot of money by yellow journal tabloids for sensationalist photos taken by committing trespass and invading people’s privacy. Contrariwise, I can’t imagine anyone would pay much for clandestine Gigafactory photos, when any newspaper’s reporter could get the same pictures simply by politely asking Tesla for a tour.

You can call them scum if you choose to. But they got a real job at a real newspaper. So, their job is NOT paparazzi but journalist which happens to be tresspassing in this case. Often, “investigative reporters” get into trouble with trespassing while working on some break through stories. It doesn’t justify the fact of breaking the law of trespassing, but it is often what happens for “behind the scene” looks.

So, you would be incorrect even though you are entitled to your opinion.

Scum is NOT a profession but a description of a person. No different than people calling each other idiots, moron, jerk or ****** here on the comment section.

“All of the other events under contention happened AFTER they attempted to leave, not in the initial confrontation.”

I guess you are okay with someone attempt to do “citizen arrest and cause bodily harm in the process then”.

How come Tesla doesn’t release any of its security camera footages about what happens after the initital confrontation?

Why do you claim that Tesla had security footage? Nobody has suggested that any such thing exists.

If they did, then it would clear everything up, wouldn’t it?

Thank you for confirming that you fabricated the existence of any security tapes, and that you never had any source supporting any claim that tapes exist.

I never claimed they exist. The word “if” is used in all cases.

Please take that big stick out of your a**…

This should be settled out of court, with charges being dropped in return for no charges on the other side.
From a legal perspective the trespasser’s have little leg to stand on due proximate or first cause laws.

If it does go to court it would be a mess with all the causes for each individual injury, to persons or property, which all relate to the first cause of the initial trespass. Luckily no one was seriously injured.

No. The trespassing paparazzi should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, especially if, as reported, one of them committed vehicular assault and battery in knocking down one of the security guards and endangering his life. Even if that hadn’t occurred, those trespassing paparazzi still need to be made an example of, to discourage people from trespassing onto an active construction site. Considering the Tesla media feeding frenzy, if trespassing is treated lightly, then it will quickly be followed by people stealing “souvenirs” from the site, then vandalism. Quoting from a KUNR, Reno Public Radio report: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Tesla co-founder and Chief Technical Officer JB Straubel addressed security concerns at the company’s gigafactory site outside of Reno after a trespassing incident late last week. Speaking at a lecture at the University of Nevada, Reno, on Sunday, Straubel said drones, small planes and even photographers with zoom lenses have been spotted around the area where they are building a $5 billion battery manufacturing plant. “It’s gotten a little bit out of control, though, and this is still an incredibly active construction site,” said Straubel. “We have to take safety very, very seriously — both for our employees, but also for… Read more »

I need a map and a story board to follow what I had just show to me on my screen.

Please include pictures, Thanks!

I’m buying the movie rights. You’re invited to the world premiere. I just hope Clooney and Pitt don’t have other commitments. 😀

Who plays the Tesla Mall Cops?

I vote Kevin Hart be one of them!

Kevin Hart could play the partner of Kevin James, the original Mall Cop. 😉

Multibillion dollar construction side, zero surveillance cameras.

There were cameras there. The reporters had them.

And Tesla has no security camera on?

Why doesn’t Tesla provide some footages about who “caused bodily harm first”?

I can only speculate that where the incident occurred, any if not all cameras were not pointing in that direction or out of range. Probably in the dirt.

Does anyone know exactly where on the premises this occurred?

Jay, is there an aerial map with a “You are here” location?

I am sure the event happened long enough for at least 1 or 2 security camera to see it.

Now, whether the footage would be “accidentally lost” is another question. 🙂

I would think that the company that has the contract has security cams somewhere also. They have to protect their million dollars of equipment.

Maybe the reporters actually did record but it also mysteriously was not available/lost/damaged by EMF?

lol, the plot thickens.

Just how many cameras, and servers to provide recording capacity, to provide coverage of a construction site covering the area of several football fields? With the cameras closely spaced enough that it would be likely anything happening on the site could be seen clearly by at least one camera?

How much would all that cost to set up and monitor over the space of a few years? Millions of dollars?

I doubt any construction company spends that kind of money just to monitor a construction site. In fact, they’d be insane to do so.

Where do you get your idea that Tesla must have had security cameras at that specific location? Brown hole?

If only some Tesla fan boy had been flying a drone with a 4k camera over the Gigafactory at the time of the altercation, then we might finally get to the bottom of this debacle.

Nix, since you like to resort on insulting, I will play down to your level from now on.

If you like to fire shots, I will play alone.

You have been notified.

MondernMarvelFan — Thank you for confirming that you fabricated the existence of any security tapes, and that you never had any source supporting any claim that tapes exist.

Sorry, but grow up, this isn’t a comic book. If you can’t take being told to grow up and stop fabricating stuff from your backside, feel free to go play with yourself alone as much as you want. Put your big boy pants on and learn that you can’t simply fabricate lies without being called out for it.

Please spare me your stupid claims about me fabricating anything.

They were simple questions of possible evidence if one exists. Most of that are in the form of questions or used the word “if”. If they don’t exist, then nothing to see. If they do, then everything will be cleared up.

Apprently you managed to get a giant stick up your arse about this whole camera thing.

So, learn to be focus on topic instead of resulting to insulting or baseless accusation and I will be more than happy to play the role being a jerk with your stupid arse.

MMF — Here let me fix your post:

“I’m man enough to admit when I am wrong, and I was completely wrong when I made this post:

ModernMarvelFan
October 20, 2015 at 8:12 pm

I am sure the event happened long enough for at least 1 or 2 security camera to see it.

Now, whether the footage would be “accidentally lost” is another question.”

There you go. Fixed it for you.

Nix, Maybe before you accuse others, you should learn to be man who knows how to read a post thread or taking that stick out of your a**. And anyone can take things out of context as you did. Luckily we can go back and follow the thread in question and see the thread for that conversation started with Couter Cat as expensive and large sites have no camera. Then I asked with clearly a question mark that it doesn’t have camera? Then Anonymous made a comment about the camera not being able to capture all the footages even if there are there. Then I made the comments which you quoted about how the camera would at least capture some of the footages. But that was purely based on Anonymous’s assumption that Camera wouldn’t be able to capture all of it. So, you need to learn read the entire post before you falsely accuse of others and further inflame the conversation by taking other people’s post out of context. While you are at it, taking that big stick out of your butt with this whole camera thing would go a long way… If you insist of taking things out of… Read more »

The site is pretty big. I would imagine the cameras would be on the buildings where the equipment would be and not on the perimeter where it is difficult to wire up too.

Regardless of which side is lying (frankly I don’t believe either of them- i think the truth lays somewhere in the middle), but I can guarantee you that the Tesla security staff that used force will be terminated.

No insurance underwriter would come close to insuring the Gigafactory site if they knew security has a pro-use of force policy, and is still employing individuals who crashed an ATF into the side of a Jeep and brandished a knife after throwing a rock through a window of a vehicle- regardless of the circumstances in which the force was used.

Take a look at Walmart. Want to know why their loss prevention staff are instructed to NOT use force when detaining shoplifters? Because of bad publicity and lawsuits.

I’ve seen force at Walmart plenty of times. Even worse than this story when it’s in the parking lot. Same thing for Target and Khols. It happens more often than you think.
All they were doing was detaining till police/sheriff got there.

If you don’t violate then nothing happens.

Wow, a gripping tale of assault and batteries.

GigaLOL!

Yeah, good one Foo.

{{{POW!!!}}}

Anonymous has a point. If MMF says there should be security video because of a billion dollar company then the reporters should also have video since they are seasoned reporters for umpteen years. I bet the reporters DO have video but incriminates them therfore it’s never mentioned.
The police should have confiscated the only camera(s) present, the reporters.

There have been an astounding number of unjustified assumptions made in the various posts in this discussion thread.

Your post is more reasonable than a lot of those above, but you have made an unwarranted assumption, too: that the deputies did not confiscate the paparazzis’ cameras.

I have to admit that some of the comments on this story are pretty hilarious. It’s one thing to like a company’s products, but it’s another to blindly defend them in a situation like this. At least you can tell who the fanboys are. This story is the best fanboy story since Elon’s divorce. In that thread there were many commenters who blamed his now or soon to be ex-wife for whatever ailed their marriage. The cult of personality was strong with that one. The real question with this story, it seems to me, is whether the force used in detaining the RGJ employee was justified. You can dig up as many Nevada statutes, which I’ll have no idea the context of, as you want, but I don’t think there’s any way we can answer that question based on the stories that have been reported. It’s not really clear how the ATV and the Jeep hit one another, which is pretty important, if you ask me. Also, I’m not totally sure that I’d buy the Sheriff’s Department’s reports as facts here, either. One key point is that this is in Storey County, which is not a hugely populous county. Reno… Read more »

Let me sum up your post:

1) You don’t believe the law, even when provided for you.

2) You don’t believe the lawmen, because you have something against this Sheriff.

3) You should have stuck with just posting “Without seeing the evidence, I can’t really offer any sort of opinion.” Because every single line of your post up to that point was purely 100% fact-free, evidence-free spouting of opinion. Maybe you should have taken your own advice…….

I believe the law, but it’s not like selected excerpts make me feel like I know everything about it. Any state’s law is riddled with exceptions and interpretations made by courts. There’s a reason why law school is 3 years long. Unless you’ve practiced criminal law in Nevada, I don’t believe you can make quick conclusions based on quoting a few statutes. For example, words are not always defined as they would be in normal English when seen in statutes.

The lawmen weren’t there for any of the events in question. Who do you think they got their story from in the reports? For all we know, the RGJ employees exercised their right to remain silent, which, IMO they’d be well advised to do, and their side never even made it to the Deputies on the scene.

Unless you take Tesla’s report at face value, I don’t see how you can definitively conclude that the use of force was justified.

CHubbs said: “For all we know, the RGJ employees exercised their right to remain silent, which, IMO they’d be well advised to do, and their side never even made it to the Deputies on the scene.” Let’s look again at the initial “police blotter” report from the Reno Journal: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A Reno Gazette-Journal photographer was arrested Friday after an altercation with private security guards protecting the Tesla gigafactory site in Storey County. Andy Barron was booked on a charge of battery with a deadly weapon, Storey County Sheriff Gerald Antinoro said. “He was arrested after an altercation with the security guards when they attempted to detain him for trespassing,” Antinoro said. Antinoro said Barron tried to drive away from guards and “either hit or almost hit one or more of the security officers.” “They were stopped at that point in time and detained until my people got there and conducted an investigation that led to the arrest of whoever was driving the vehicle,” Antinoro said. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ [end quote] Please note the phrase “conducted an investigation”. The suggestion that the Sheriff’s deputies just took the security guards’ word for everything that happened is absurd, and shows a clear bias. What we… Read more »
What sort of investigation could they conduct? Talk to security, look at the damage to the vehicles, and check the injuries to at least the one security guard? Talk to the RGJ employees if they didn’t take the 5th? I also think that you could not be more wrong about the RGJ employees remaining silent. Any attorney would advise them to remain silent, and it seems that they weren’t talking to security before the Sheriff’s Deputies arrived. There’s no reason to believe they would talk to them, either. If I’m accused of a crime, especially a felony, I wouldn’t be telling my side of the story at the scene. It is a huge assumption to believe that they did talk to the Deputies. They knowingly trespassed, and I don’t think it’s a huge leap to think they had a plan for what they would do if they were caught. I think if you were that situation, you would be making a huge mistake by talking to law enforcement no matter what the security did. The time to tell your story is in court. As far as the Deputiies’ report, as I’ve stated, you can’t take it as gospel. They were… Read more »

Wasn’t the issue inside the property rights of the company, as defined by a fence? Where are the pics the Photog’s took as they moved in for ‘The Kill’ in their hunt for secrets?

With most 35mm digital cameras, video can also record audio, so even if the camera is not raised and aimed, it can record a timeline. If these two were being attacked, first, why would they not have some pics, video, or audio of this?

On the otherhand, if you are trespassing and trying to get away, I can see a good reason not to record that!

This is nothing more then a local crime blotter story that will eventually get straightened out in court but it is funny how Sven and other serial Tesla-haters are trying to spin it.

Must suck not having a life?

+1

It says something about a person who can’t admire someone like Musk, who could have taken his millions and spent his prime topping supermodels and playing polo, but instead decided to take on two of the most challenging industries there are to try to make a difference in the world.